garageman's Blog

the thing is, even after the dems bill failed. The republican plan which, cost taxpayers nothing,
Insured losses made on the money not the whole debt. would be paid for, by the holder of the debt.

This bail - out requires the treasury to buy the bad debts, then any liquidating will also cost us money.

Republican plan would have required the debt holder to liquidate the asset.

This is classic partisanship, this was Democrat politics.

In time of crisis, what was best for Democrats, was more important then, what is right for America.

Good luck in your campaign, I can't give you my vote,(do to location) but you are welcome to use any of my words.

It was a showdown to cherish for critics of Wall Street's culture of enrichment. The grim-faced boss of the bankrupt bank Lehman Brothers was left squirming yesterday as a veteran Democrat roasted him over his multimillion-dollar pay.

"Your company is now bankrupt and our country is in a state of crisis," said the chairman of the House oversight committee, Henry Waxman,. "You get to keep $480m. I have a very basic question: Is that fair?"

The chairman of the committee held up a chart suggesting that Fuld's personal remuneration totaled $480m over eight years, including payouts of $91m in 2001 and $89m in 2005.

Fuld, of course, failed to answer the question.

Ron Paul wouldn't have went with the bailout to begin with.
The point is why are these companies going under when their employees are raking in outrageous amounts of money?
Why are we paying to save their butts when they have the money to save their own company?

Although I'm not in the "Katbird" seat, from where I sit it's easy to see that whether Fuld's level of income was fair or not is irrelevent. What is relevent is that I would expect someone with that kind of income to have the contacts and the stroke to bail themselves out. Something the CEO of AIG apparently was willing to do with some partners and instead was forced to take government money and the oversight that goes with it. FOUR TIMES the money he thought he needed to do it on his own.

In third world countries, government exists to protect the rich and their investments.

Evidently, not just in third world countries.

Buried in the back pages behind coverage of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, was a $25 billion bailout (low-interest loans) for the Detroit automakers. Petty cash, really.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081
001/AUTO01/810010350

I'm still waiting for my representatives in Washington to pass a bailout for my Capital One VISA card.

PS

If you've been following the Wall Street bailout, you'll find some interesting reading at LewRockwell.com

I suspect had AIG exec's been spending their own money they may have opted for a hot bath and a cup of tea to relieve their stress. This is further proof that AIG ought to have been left to they're own devices.